Roy Culley <rgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> begin risky.vbs
> Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 00:33:48 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>> ,----[ Further Quote ]
>>>| "This new scam is like phishing without the intervening electronic
>>>| mail step," Quarterman said. "Because it is the bank's own web
>>>| (hosted, in this and no doubt many other cases) server that is
>>>| compromised, the customer has even less reason to suspect anything amiss."
>>> Speaking from experience, the bank managers will not blame Windows. Never!
>>> Windows is golden! Nothing else exists.
>> Ok, then by your argument, Linus should be held accountable for this:
>> The server is run on, you guessed it, Linux.
>> You really want to start blaming the OS every time this happens?
> Exactly where does it say the server was running Linux? The IP address
> is not revealed in the url but the extension is .htm. Now I know one
> OS that uses 3 char extenstions and it ain't Linux.
I cannot imageine how anyone could be stupid enough to run a site
needing security on Windows. Any bank, in particular, should sack their
whole IT department for even suggesting it, let alone doing it - this is
utterly foolish. Linux is a /far/ better choice.
| Mark Kent -- mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
I use technology in order to hate it more properly.
-- Nam June Paik